Roster Sets

pujol5 · 01-19-2004, 02:35 PM

Just wondering...which roster sets to do you guys feel are the best and why? Personally, I like GForce because there are many more 5 star prospects than in other sets. It has about 1 5 star per team which is about right. Most systems have 1 STAR that will be great. A system might not have that player, but there is always one dominant system taht has 2 or 3.

rem · 01-19-2004, 03:56 PM

I like Rocco's. Mostly because the contracts are so accurate.

UD411Flyer · 01-19-2004, 04:03 PM

Does anyon have a link to rocco's?

UD411Flyer · 01-19-2004, 04:09 PM

nvm--im blind

slugger21 · 01-19-2004, 04:24 PM

i like rocco's as well

sporr · 01-19-2004, 05:00 PM

I like Erich Ingram's (Rolen17) OOTP3 roster set. It was the best set I've ever seen...oh wait, you mean current roster set? I've viewed but never tried either of them.

rem · 01-19-2004, 11:21 PM

www.mbl2.com/TradeDeadline.zip

Not sure if you still wanted this or not. I also like having a complete hall of fame and him listing if players where drafted in the first round, when the made the all-star team, won the World Series etc.

GODHAN · 01-20-2004, 07:54 AM

Rocco's is cool cuz it shows the average player's salary over the course of the contract, rather than the 2003 salary. The salaries, however, are based on 70% of the actual. Yet, this is better than some other sets, which seems to use the 2003 salary, not accounting for annual raises the real-life contracts have, ie A-Rod, Manny will make a lot more towards the end of the contract than the first few years.

However, I did notice that Rocco's doesn't portray markets accurately. For instance, everyone knows the Red Sox have die-hard fans. Yet, Boston is listed as a "Huge" market in the roster set. Then on the other side of the equation, you have LA, which is listed at a "slightly above average" market. For leagues that don't have balance financial systems, the Dodgers are at a disadvantage, with a 80 mil payroll to start, and projected revenues of about $60 mil. Also, in the NL West, the Giants have huge revenues, nearing 100 mil... and the D'backs and Rockies are also more financially prosperous than the Dodgers... so in the end, without drastic price lowering, or roster changes to become a contender, the Dodgers do not come near their 2002 or real-life 2003 attendance.

01-19-2004, 02:35 PM	#1
pujol5 Minors (Single A) Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 50	Roster Sets Just wondering...which roster sets to do you guys feel are the best and why? Personally, I like GForce because there are many more 5 star prospects than in other sets. It has about 1 5 star per team which is about right. Most systems have 1 STAR that will be great. A system might not have that player, but there is always one dominant system taht has 2 or 3.

01-19-2004, 03:56 PM	#2
rem Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: College Park, Md. Posts: 5,024	I like Rocco's. Mostly because the contracts are so accurate. __________________ OTBA: Washington Filibusters CLBR: Minnesota Twins 2005 Winner of LL's Pick the Loser Contest! - 15-0

01-19-2004, 04:03 PM	#3
UD411Flyer All Star Reserve Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 583	Does anyon have a link to rocco's? __________________ Behind The Pl8-Chicago Cubs/Commissioner EIBL-Atlanta Braves/Commissioner NOBSL-Tampa Bay Devil Rays AAA-Sacranton-WB Red Barons ATGC-Orrville Red Riders

01-19-2004, 04:09 PM	#4
UD411Flyer All Star Reserve Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 583	nvm--im blind __________________ Behind The Pl8-Chicago Cubs/Commissioner EIBL-Atlanta Braves/Commissioner NOBSL-Tampa Bay Devil Rays AAA-Sacranton-WB Red Barons ATGC-Orrville Red Riders

01-19-2004, 04:24 PM	#5
slugger21 Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 106	i like rocco's as well __________________ ULB -Cleveland Indians GM AHBA -Cleveland Indians GM

01-19-2004, 05:00 PM	#6
sporr Global Moderator Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Muscatine, IA Posts: 8,277	I like Erich Ingram's (Rolen17) OOTP3 roster set. It was the best set I've ever seen...oh wait, you mean current roster set? I've viewed but never tried either of them.

01-19-2004, 11:21 PM	#7
rem Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: College Park, Md. Posts: 5,024	www.mbl2.com/TradeDeadline.zip Not sure if you still wanted this or not. I also like having a complete hall of fame and him listing if players where drafted in the first round, when the made the all-star team, won the World Series etc. __________________ OTBA: Washington Filibusters CLBR: Minnesota Twins 2005 Winner of LL's Pick the Loser Contest! - 15-0

01-20-2004, 07:54 AM	#8
GODHAN Minors (Double A) Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: LA, NY Posts: 123	Rocco's is cool cuz it shows the average player's salary over the course of the contract, rather than the 2003 salary. The salaries, however, are based on 70% of the actual. Yet, this is better than some other sets, which seems to use the 2003 salary, not accounting for annual raises the real-life contracts have, ie A-Rod, Manny will make a lot more towards the end of the contract than the first few years. However, I did notice that Rocco's doesn't portray markets accurately. For instance, everyone knows the Red Sox have die-hard fans. Yet, Boston is listed as a "Huge" market in the roster set. Then on the other side of the equation, you have LA, which is listed at a "slightly above average" market. For leagues that don't have balance financial systems, the Dodgers are at a disadvantage, with a 80 mil payroll to start, and projected revenues of about $60 mil. Also, in the NL West, the Giants have huge revenues, nearing 100 mil... and the D'backs and Rockies are also more financially prosperous than the Dodgers... so in the end, without drastic price lowering, or roster changes to become a contender, the Dodgers do not come near their 2002 or real-life 2003 attendance. __________________ Dodger Blue Forever LA Dodgers - Stat Geeks Anaheim Angels - Aaron Smart Baseball LA Dodgers - Big League Baseball